DOI issue:
July 12, 1884
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.17757#0029
July 12, 1884.]
PUNCH, OP THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
21
these replies would have satisfied him ; tor he answered the question
for us. “ Every one,” he said, “ looks upon food as not only
making up for the loss of tissue, but—” and then followed a
highly scientific explanation, which I was too ignorant to under-
stand or even to follow. However, I was rather pleased than other-
wise to learn that that was what the Lecturer believed I thought
about food.
Having disposed of the consideration of food as a material-restoring
article, we came to another conundrum—What did we do with food ?
Here the answer took everyone completely by surprise. Prepared by
the last question for something ultra-scientific, we all expected that
the correct response to ‘‘what, we ought to do with food?” would
turn out to be to use it somehow or other as a very difficult equa-
tion in mixed mathematics, we therefore were greatly relieved to
learn that the required solution was merely “ to put it in the mouth.”
This explanation caused a feeling of the heartiest sympathy to spring
up between the Lecturer and the Lectured. On the strength of
having made so important a discovery there was scarcely anyone
present who did not consider himself or herself fully qualified to be
made on the spot a F.R.S., or, at any rate, a Member of the Royal
Geographical Society. Having put the food in our mouths, so to
speak, the Lecturer then divulged another secret—When it was there
we should “ crush it with our teeth.” This was also satisfactory so
far as it went, although, perhaps, an old-fashioned nurse might have
complained that this was scarcely “ eating like a Christian.” Having
got so far we went a step further. The Lecturer, taking a piece of
chalk, approached a black board, and told us that he would write
down what food was made of. Upon this several gourmets in the
audience rose from their chairs and looked excitedly towards the
platform, evidently expecting that the Lecturer was going to favour
them with a few recipes for something effectual in the shape of an
entree, or a pick-me-up to be taken after the bird. These “ greedy
ones ” (as they would have been called in the English translation to
an Italian Opera libretto) were greatly disappointed by finding that
the writing on the board was as follows :—
1. Proteids.
2. Carbohydrates.
3. Fat.
However, one of them entered the materials of this mystic com-
pound in a note-book, evidently with a view of sending it down to
the kitchen of his Club to see what the Chef would make of it. But
1 am afraid from this point to very nearly the end of the lecture the
address to the majority of those present was from its ex treme learn-
iug unintelligible. But, so far as I could make out, we were invited
vith the utmost earnestness to give all the energies of our minds to a
most careful consideration of saliva. Something like twenty minutes
was devoted to this interesting subject. The black board was again
put into requisition, and we learned what were its component parts,
and our attention was directed to a placard dealing with the matter,
containing a table prepared by a gentleman of the name of Schmidt,
who seemed to be an enthusiast about saliva. The audience
listened most patiently to all the Lecturer had to say, applauding
whenever they came upon a familiar name. Thus a passing reference
to glycerine produced a burst of cheering, and when he told us that
the effect of mixing water with starch was to make it into paste the
enthusiasm was general. When, from the demeanour of the auditory,
the Lecturer gathered that his learning was a little above their heads,
he addressed himself personally to the Chairman, who appeared much
gratified at the polite attention. But at length having seemingly
exhausted the subject (but only for the moment, as he concluded this
part of his lecture by saying “that it must not be lost sight of”), he
turned his attention to another pleasing topic—gastric juice. Here
again we had some statistics. We were shown some pictures on the
wall which had been taken for mushrooms earlier in the afternoon,
but now turned out to be “ crude, very crude ” (so the Lecturer
called them) sketches of a dog’s stomach. This show of “action”
was received with the heartiest approval. For a moment we were
quite carried away, and expectation was again aroused that we
might see, after alt, a “ brilliant experiment.”
If the Lecturer had seized this moment for setting fire to a bowl of
water, or creating “sparkling coruscations” in a jar, the discourse
would have ended in a perfect blaze of triumph. But alas! the
opportunity was lost. A. few minutes later our Instructor fell back
;xgain upon his learned technicalities. Once more he stood on the plat-
form, with the Long rod, stretching its length over the heads of the
audience, as if its holder were fishing, and once more the ignorant
multitude were hopelessly bewildered by the floods of knowledge let
loose upon them. Some of us now and then caught a fact sufficiently
simple to be appreciated. Thus we learned that there was a fierce
and bitter controversy about gastric juice (in which Schmidt the
Salivary Gland Enthusiast seemingly took part) in the year 1830.
Again we learned that food cannot be taken without much inward
blushing. Lastly, we distinctly caught the word “ pepsine.” The
Lecturer informed us that he proposed to answer his own question—
“What is pepsine?” The now weary audience woke up at once,
believing that they were going to assist at the discovery of a trade-
secret. But no; the explanation was too difficult for comprehension.
Certainly the Lecturer poured into a funnel, containing apparently
some red macaroni, a liquid which he seemed to think would melt
the substance, but this did not help us much. He tried also to drum
into our heads the component parts of pepsine, and, as a reward for
his labours, fostered the idea amongst some of us (especially those
who were a “little hard of hearing”) that one of those parts was
“ Pimlico.” I am afraid that after this we got rather drowsy, until
we were startled into showing a gleam of enthusiasm by finding that
the Lecturer had apparently given up gastric juice and was making
constant allusion to cheese.
It was at this point, when the thing seemed to be becoming really
interesting, that our Instructor, with the consent of the Chairman,
broke off. He thanked us for our attention, and promised to “ appear
again ” on another occasion. I can only trust that, when that happy
time is reached, the Lecturer will have introduced “ new features ”
in his discourse. Seriously, a few dissolving views, a performing
pig, an acrobat or two and a piano would “lighten” the entertain-
ment immensely. The suggestion is thrown out for what it is worth.
Its value may be small, but it is, at any rate, worthy of considera-
tion.
A SONG OF SUIT AND SERVICE.
[Suggested by the Prolixity of some late Legal Proceedings. )
Oh, pity the poor Juryman who’s summoned to attend
At a Court of Law in the long long jaw where Counsel breath expend
And my Lord Judge heeds not ever a straw the harangue of my
learned friend!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman that has to endure a run
Of witnesses examined and cross-examined every one
At a length to the very uttermost it can possibly be outspun !
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, compelled to swear and say
That he will “well and truly try ” the cause, be it what it may,
According to the evidence—when his mind is far away!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, of thought-control in lack,
Thought of home and pleasant Missis there, and left behind his back,
Oh, the business which he fears meanwhile is going all to wrack!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman with a felony to the fore,
When the Jury may not separate till the tedious trial is o’er,
Locked up together every night while he hears the sleepers snore 1
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, for the time it takes to try
A criminal charge which may terminate in the culprit’s doom to die !
There was no delay day after day like that in the days gone by.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman! On Saturday the case
Was tried, when Law within a day bade sus : per coll: take place,
That Sunday, being a dies non, might be therefore a day of grace.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman such a spell now bound to stay !
The trial was wellnigh certain, then, to be over in a day,
With justice to the prisoner done in a summary sort of way.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman ! His duty, which he owes
His country, he of course must do ; but spare him needless woes
And distresses that come from prolix humdrum, while the tide of
dull talk flows.
The School-Boabd Screw.—The High Court of Justice, reversing
a judgment of some Borough Justices, has decided that the Master of
a certain Board School committed an assault by detaining a scholar
in school after school hours, as a punishment for declining, in obedi-
ence to parental instructions, to do “home lessons.” As against the
system of over-pressure in schools, this will no doubt be generally
allowed to be a very proper vindication of Home Rule. Besides, if
the Education Act assimilated home to school, it would be no longer
true that “ there is no place like home.”
Macbeth is sufficiently full of murders without the additional
couple perpetrated by M. Richepin, as Adapter, and Mme. Sabah
Bebnhakdt, as the representative of Lady Macbeth of the Porte
St. Martin. However, in such hot weather, anything like a real
“Frost” is refreshing, though a trifle dangerous to some constitutions.
Prince Bismarck says Germany has no Colonial Policy. Jean de
Mabia Farina ! Hasn’t she ! ! Make Cologne as sweet smelling as
its water, and that will be an Eau-de-Coiogne-ial Policy welcomed
by all European travellers.
PUNCH, OP THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
21
these replies would have satisfied him ; tor he answered the question
for us. “ Every one,” he said, “ looks upon food as not only
making up for the loss of tissue, but—” and then followed a
highly scientific explanation, which I was too ignorant to under-
stand or even to follow. However, I was rather pleased than other-
wise to learn that that was what the Lecturer believed I thought
about food.
Having disposed of the consideration of food as a material-restoring
article, we came to another conundrum—What did we do with food ?
Here the answer took everyone completely by surprise. Prepared by
the last question for something ultra-scientific, we all expected that
the correct response to ‘‘what, we ought to do with food?” would
turn out to be to use it somehow or other as a very difficult equa-
tion in mixed mathematics, we therefore were greatly relieved to
learn that the required solution was merely “ to put it in the mouth.”
This explanation caused a feeling of the heartiest sympathy to spring
up between the Lecturer and the Lectured. On the strength of
having made so important a discovery there was scarcely anyone
present who did not consider himself or herself fully qualified to be
made on the spot a F.R.S., or, at any rate, a Member of the Royal
Geographical Society. Having put the food in our mouths, so to
speak, the Lecturer then divulged another secret—When it was there
we should “ crush it with our teeth.” This was also satisfactory so
far as it went, although, perhaps, an old-fashioned nurse might have
complained that this was scarcely “ eating like a Christian.” Having
got so far we went a step further. The Lecturer, taking a piece of
chalk, approached a black board, and told us that he would write
down what food was made of. Upon this several gourmets in the
audience rose from their chairs and looked excitedly towards the
platform, evidently expecting that the Lecturer was going to favour
them with a few recipes for something effectual in the shape of an
entree, or a pick-me-up to be taken after the bird. These “ greedy
ones ” (as they would have been called in the English translation to
an Italian Opera libretto) were greatly disappointed by finding that
the writing on the board was as follows :—
1. Proteids.
2. Carbohydrates.
3. Fat.
However, one of them entered the materials of this mystic com-
pound in a note-book, evidently with a view of sending it down to
the kitchen of his Club to see what the Chef would make of it. But
1 am afraid from this point to very nearly the end of the lecture the
address to the majority of those present was from its ex treme learn-
iug unintelligible. But, so far as I could make out, we were invited
vith the utmost earnestness to give all the energies of our minds to a
most careful consideration of saliva. Something like twenty minutes
was devoted to this interesting subject. The black board was again
put into requisition, and we learned what were its component parts,
and our attention was directed to a placard dealing with the matter,
containing a table prepared by a gentleman of the name of Schmidt,
who seemed to be an enthusiast about saliva. The audience
listened most patiently to all the Lecturer had to say, applauding
whenever they came upon a familiar name. Thus a passing reference
to glycerine produced a burst of cheering, and when he told us that
the effect of mixing water with starch was to make it into paste the
enthusiasm was general. When, from the demeanour of the auditory,
the Lecturer gathered that his learning was a little above their heads,
he addressed himself personally to the Chairman, who appeared much
gratified at the polite attention. But at length having seemingly
exhausted the subject (but only for the moment, as he concluded this
part of his lecture by saying “that it must not be lost sight of”), he
turned his attention to another pleasing topic—gastric juice. Here
again we had some statistics. We were shown some pictures on the
wall which had been taken for mushrooms earlier in the afternoon,
but now turned out to be “ crude, very crude ” (so the Lecturer
called them) sketches of a dog’s stomach. This show of “action”
was received with the heartiest approval. For a moment we were
quite carried away, and expectation was again aroused that we
might see, after alt, a “ brilliant experiment.”
If the Lecturer had seized this moment for setting fire to a bowl of
water, or creating “sparkling coruscations” in a jar, the discourse
would have ended in a perfect blaze of triumph. But alas! the
opportunity was lost. A. few minutes later our Instructor fell back
;xgain upon his learned technicalities. Once more he stood on the plat-
form, with the Long rod, stretching its length over the heads of the
audience, as if its holder were fishing, and once more the ignorant
multitude were hopelessly bewildered by the floods of knowledge let
loose upon them. Some of us now and then caught a fact sufficiently
simple to be appreciated. Thus we learned that there was a fierce
and bitter controversy about gastric juice (in which Schmidt the
Salivary Gland Enthusiast seemingly took part) in the year 1830.
Again we learned that food cannot be taken without much inward
blushing. Lastly, we distinctly caught the word “ pepsine.” The
Lecturer informed us that he proposed to answer his own question—
“What is pepsine?” The now weary audience woke up at once,
believing that they were going to assist at the discovery of a trade-
secret. But no; the explanation was too difficult for comprehension.
Certainly the Lecturer poured into a funnel, containing apparently
some red macaroni, a liquid which he seemed to think would melt
the substance, but this did not help us much. He tried also to drum
into our heads the component parts of pepsine, and, as a reward for
his labours, fostered the idea amongst some of us (especially those
who were a “little hard of hearing”) that one of those parts was
“ Pimlico.” I am afraid that after this we got rather drowsy, until
we were startled into showing a gleam of enthusiasm by finding that
the Lecturer had apparently given up gastric juice and was making
constant allusion to cheese.
It was at this point, when the thing seemed to be becoming really
interesting, that our Instructor, with the consent of the Chairman,
broke off. He thanked us for our attention, and promised to “ appear
again ” on another occasion. I can only trust that, when that happy
time is reached, the Lecturer will have introduced “ new features ”
in his discourse. Seriously, a few dissolving views, a performing
pig, an acrobat or two and a piano would “lighten” the entertain-
ment immensely. The suggestion is thrown out for what it is worth.
Its value may be small, but it is, at any rate, worthy of considera-
tion.
A SONG OF SUIT AND SERVICE.
[Suggested by the Prolixity of some late Legal Proceedings. )
Oh, pity the poor Juryman who’s summoned to attend
At a Court of Law in the long long jaw where Counsel breath expend
And my Lord Judge heeds not ever a straw the harangue of my
learned friend!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman that has to endure a run
Of witnesses examined and cross-examined every one
At a length to the very uttermost it can possibly be outspun !
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, compelled to swear and say
That he will “well and truly try ” the cause, be it what it may,
According to the evidence—when his mind is far away!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, of thought-control in lack,
Thought of home and pleasant Missis there, and left behind his back,
Oh, the business which he fears meanwhile is going all to wrack!
Oh, pity the poor Juryman with a felony to the fore,
When the Jury may not separate till the tedious trial is o’er,
Locked up together every night while he hears the sleepers snore 1
Oh, pity the poor Juryman, for the time it takes to try
A criminal charge which may terminate in the culprit’s doom to die !
There was no delay day after day like that in the days gone by.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman! On Saturday the case
Was tried, when Law within a day bade sus : per coll: take place,
That Sunday, being a dies non, might be therefore a day of grace.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman such a spell now bound to stay !
The trial was wellnigh certain, then, to be over in a day,
With justice to the prisoner done in a summary sort of way.
Oh, pity the poor Juryman ! His duty, which he owes
His country, he of course must do ; but spare him needless woes
And distresses that come from prolix humdrum, while the tide of
dull talk flows.
The School-Boabd Screw.—The High Court of Justice, reversing
a judgment of some Borough Justices, has decided that the Master of
a certain Board School committed an assault by detaining a scholar
in school after school hours, as a punishment for declining, in obedi-
ence to parental instructions, to do “home lessons.” As against the
system of over-pressure in schools, this will no doubt be generally
allowed to be a very proper vindication of Home Rule. Besides, if
the Education Act assimilated home to school, it would be no longer
true that “ there is no place like home.”
Macbeth is sufficiently full of murders without the additional
couple perpetrated by M. Richepin, as Adapter, and Mme. Sabah
Bebnhakdt, as the representative of Lady Macbeth of the Porte
St. Martin. However, in such hot weather, anything like a real
“Frost” is refreshing, though a trifle dangerous to some constitutions.
Prince Bismarck says Germany has no Colonial Policy. Jean de
Mabia Farina ! Hasn’t she ! ! Make Cologne as sweet smelling as
its water, and that will be an Eau-de-Coiogne-ial Policy welcomed
by all European travellers.